<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Colleagues</div><div><br></div><div>If we, who have been so involved in this process, are having these definitional issues I can only presume the potential difficulties for the non-initiate... Let us resolve these issues as soon as possible as it seems the FAQs may be very important to those reviewing the proposal. In the interest of utility let us work to assure that the perfect does not become the enemy of the good.</div><div><br></div><div>Joe <br><br>Sent from my iPad</div><div><br>On Aug 21, 2015, at 4:45 AM, Kavouss Arasteh <<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">Hi Lynn</font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">Re Your Questions and Comments </font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">Here are my Reply<br>
Question</font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3"> <em>I am not clear on your objections, can you clarify
please? Is the objection over the roles of the 3 OCs (as described below)
with respect to the(ir) IFO or perhaps the IFO and the PTI are conflated in the
text below.</em></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">Answer </font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#0000ff" face="Calibri" size="3">My comments relate mostly to the responsibilities of the
three OCs and to the smaller extent to the IFO and PTI </font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">For the first pls see my comments earlier sent and I do not
want to repeat them. One should not put Numbers and Protocols at the level of
responsibilities as those of NAMES DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE FORMER MAY OR MAY
NOT HAVE CONTRACTs or SLAs WITH PTI THUS MAY ACT WITHIN THEIR
CONTRACT through ICANN </font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3"> </font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">Your explanation <br>
My ANSWER</font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">I suggest the following modifications </font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><br><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3"><font color="#0000ff">
The 3 OCs l, Based On Their Mandate, ,areas of Responsibilities their Roles and
their relation with PTI wil be responsible, for evaluating the performance
of their respective IFO functions (through various community managed monitoring
mechanisms). They will also be responsible for ensuring that any
deficiencies are brought back through appropriate mechanism for remedial actions,
as appropriate into line with expected service levels. While today, the
IFO for all 3 OCs is in one organization (department), the OCs have all made it
clear in their proposals that the responsibility for who their IANA functions
operator will be in the future will reside with the individual communities.<br>
</font><br>
It can be hard to find words that capture the appropriate intent of all 3
proposals, so perhaps ICG members from the 3 communities can also help
clarify/suggest text. In the interest of moving this along, I suggested
some edits (in caps) that may help, but again Kavouss, I am not sure I
understand your objections, so these may miss the mark.<br>
<br>
Current: "The three Operating Communities (OCs) are responsible for
evaluating the performance of the IFO and for making whatever decisions are
required to ensure their community\u2019s needs and expectations are met, including
choosing/changing their IANA functions operator."<br>
<br>
Proposed: "The three Operating Communities (OCs) are responsible for
evaluating the performance of THEIR IFO and for making whatever decisions are
required to ensure their community\u2019s needs and expectations are met, including
choosing/changing the IANA functions operator FOR THEIR SET OF IANA FUNCTIONS."</font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">My suggestions for the above is as proposed at the beginning
of the comment which I introduce it again</font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3"><font color="#0000ff">\u201c The 3 OCs l, Based On Their Mandate, ,areas of
Responsibilities their Roles and their relation with PTI ( direct relation through separate Contracts between Number and Parameter communities or through ICANN) will be
responsible, for evaluating the performance of their respective IFO functions
(through various community managed monitoring mechanisms).
They will also be responsible for ensuring that any deficiencies are brought
back through appropriate mechanism for remedial actions, as appropriate into
line with expected service levels. While today, the IFO for all 3 OCs is
in one organization (department), the OCs have all made it clear in their
proposals that the responsibility for who their IANA functions operator will be
in the future will reside with the individual communities.\u201d</font><br>
<br>
<br>
Kavouss </font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3">
</font><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-08-21 9:31 GMT+02:00 Subrenat, Jean-Jacques <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jjs@dyalog.net" target="_blank">jjs@dyalog.net</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid">Alan's formulation, with more specific answers to more limited questions, is a pretty good solution.<br>
<span><br>
Jean-Jacques.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
----- Mail original -----<br>
</span>De: "Alan Barrett" <<a href="mailto:apb@cequrux.com" target="_blank">apb@cequrux.com</a>><br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:internal-cg@ianacg.org" target="_blank">internal-cg@ianacg.org</a><br>
Envoy�: Jeudi 20 Ao�t 2015 16:53:13<br>
Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Questions from webinars<br>
<div><div><br>
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015, Lynn St.Amour wrote:<br>
> Thank you to all those who have reviewed these FAQs. In the<br>
> attached document, I accepted all those changes, and believe<br>
> there is only one remaining area needing review. The response<br>
> to the question: "How is PTI different from the current IANA<br>
> department?" was very focused on the naming functions while not<br>
> making that explicit. I added a few lines to try and clarify<br>
> that (virtually all from the various proposals) and to include<br>
> all the OC proposals.<br>
><br>
> A quick review would be very helpful and once we have agreement,<br>
> I will work with the secretariat to get these posted. Hopefully<br>
> very soon, given the comment period is well underway.<br>
<br>
I think that Lynn's answer is accurate, but I suggest splitting it into<br>
a few smaller questions/answer pairs, as indicated below.<br>
<br>
Lynn's question and answer:<br>
<br>
> Q: How is PTI different from the current IANA department?<br>
><br>
> A: In their proposal, the Names community proposed to form a<br>
> new, separate legal entity (PTI) in the form of a non-profit<br>
> corporation (i.e., a California public benefit corporation).<br>
> They proposed that ICANN enter into a contract with PTI to<br>
> serve as the IANA Functions Operator (IFO) for the naming<br>
> functions. The entire IANA functions department staff currently<br>
> housed in ICANN, and related resources, processes, data, and<br>
> know-how will be legally transferred to PTI. The PTI will be an<br>
> affiliate (subsidiary) of ICANN and ICANN will be responsible<br>
> for its stewardship.<br>
><br>
> The Number and Protocol Parameter communities have proposed<br>
> that the current contractual relationships with ICANN for the<br>
> IANA Functions Operator be maintained, and if necessary ICANN<br>
> sub-contract the registry functions to PTI.<br>
><br>
> The three Operating Communities (OCs) are responsible for<br>
> evaluating the performance of THEIR IFO and for making whatever<br>
> decisions are required to ensure their community=92s needs and<br>
> expectations are met, including choosing/changing the IANA<br>
> functions operator FOR THEIR SET OF IANA FUNCTIONS.<br>
<br>
Alan Barrett's suggestion:<br>
<br>
Q: What is the Post-Transition IANA (PTI)?<br>
<br>
A: In their proposal, the Names community proposed to form a<br>
new, separate legal entity (PTI) in the form of a non-profit<br>
corporation (i.e., a California public benefit corporation).<br>
They proposed that ICANN enter into a contract with PTI to serve<br>
as the IANA Functions Operator (IFO) for the naming functions.<br>
The entire IANA functions department staff currently housed in<br>
ICANN, and related resources, processes, data, and know-how will<br>
be legally transferred to PTI. The PTI will be an affiliate<br>
(subsidiary) of ICANN and ICANN will be responsible for its<br>
stewardship.<br>
<br>
Q: What is the relationship between PTI and the existing IANA<br>
department within ICANN?<br>
<br>
A: PTI is expected to employ the same people and perfom the same<br>
work using the same resources as the current IANA department<br>
within ICANN. The difference is that PTI will be a separate legal<br>
entity, while the current IANA department is legally part of<br>
ICANN.<br>
<br>
Q: How will the three Operating Communities (OCs) interact with<br>
PTI?<br>
<br>
A: The Names community has proposed that ICANN (in its role as the<br>
policy coordinating body for the names community) will contract<br>
with PTI for operation of the IANA naming functions. The Number<br>
and Protocol Parameter communities have proposed to contract with<br>
ICANN for the operatation of their IANA functions, and to allow<br>
ICANN to sub-contract to PTI.<br>
<br>
Q: How will performance be evaluated?<br>
<br>
A: The three Operating Communities (OCs) are responsible for<br>
evaluating the performance of their parts of the IANA functions,<br>
and for making whatever decisions are required to ensure<br>
their community's needs and expectations are met, including<br>
choosing/changing the IANA functions operator for their part of<br>
the IANA functions.<br>
<br>
--apb (Alan Barrett)<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Internal-cg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org" target="_blank">Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Internal-cg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org" target="_blank">Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Internal-cg mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org">Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org">http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>